California Doing California Things

[Politesse]

I didn't really know Royal Robbins, but we did once go to a dinner party to which he and his wife were also guests, as a lad. He had some pretty good slides, as you might imagine.

 

[Patooka]

Why is "homeless" in quotation marks?

Matthew Seedorff is a longtime FOX News reporter, to add a bit of context. He describes himself as an IRONMAN athlete (yes in all caps).

I made the mistake of looking at his twitter feed. It's as cringey as you'd think. I'm not surprised Swiz follows him.

 

[Politesse]

The daffy thing is that Republicans fervently oppose any and all actual efforts to assist unhomed families, whenever all the hand-wringing accidentally leads to the formation of a concrete plan or policy. Our rehousing program at the school where I work is under constant peril of being axed by the Board, and I assure its two relatively Progressive members are not the ones leading that charge.

If you're a Republican, the "homeless" are not true citizens, and their woes are not a practical problem to be solved. The "homeless" are a symbol of moral degeneracy, to he shunned and feared as symbols of God's wrath toward a wicked people. They want the "problem" to go away by magic, dammit, not with work, and definitely not with funding! If we would just elect some millionaire minor celebrity who lives in Orange County and brags about his gun collection to be the governor, the "homeless" would just melt away into the aether.

 

[Politesse]

If you disagree, Tswizzle, prove me wrong. If you do agree, roll your eyes.

 

[thebeave]

The daffy thing is that Republicans fervently oppose any and all actual efforts to assist unhomed families, whenever all the hand-wringing accidentally leads to the formation of a concrete plan or policy. Our rehousing program at the school where I work is under constant peril of being axed by the Board, and I assure its two relatively Progressive members are not the ones leading that charge.

If you're a Republican, the "homeless" are not true citizens, and their woes are not a practical problem to be solved. The "homeless" are a symbol of moral degeneracy, to he shunned and feared as symbols of God's wrath toward a wicked people. They want the "problem" to go away by magic, dammit, not with work, and definitely not with funding! If we would just elect some millionaire minor celebrity who lives in Orange County and brags about his gun collection to be the governor, the "homeless" would just melt away into the aether.

Dude, you need to stop with the Republican blaming. No doubt they are complicit in this mess to some (small) degree, but the lion's share is on the backs of the Democrats, particularly the progressives, who have run our big cities and the state largely unencumbered for many years now. This article from last year from the Stanford SIEPR does a good job of showing year over year data on how much we are spending and how much/little is getting accomplished:

Homelessness in California: Recent challenges and new horizons

Key Takeaways​

• Despite historic government investments over the last decade, California’s homelessness crisis remains among the worst in the US.
• Insufficient shelter capacity, lack of permanent housing, and weakened incentives for drug treatment drive persistently high rates of homelessness, particularly unsheltered, relative to other states.
• Data collection and transparency have not kept pace with spending and need to be improved to accurately assess the effectiveness of policies and government spending on homelessness.

Between 2007 and 2014, the number of people experiencing homelessness in California declined from 140k to 114k. But, after that, homelessness began accelerating (Figure 1), even as billions of dollars in federal, state, and local spending poured in to address the problem. Several factors have contributed to the persistence of homelessness in California despite these investments, including a continued dearth of shelter beds, high and rising housing costs, and changes in policies around drug offenses.

And don't ask me what I'm doing about it, as though I have any say-so or authority.

 

[Elixir]

A significant portion of the homeless have serious mental health issues and physical problems and/pr substance abuse problems.

Sure; But how much of the mental health and substance abuse problem is a cause of homelessness, and how much a consequence of it?

Further, if an individual actually prefers homelessness, are they necessarily suffering mental illness? Are they living in isolation in the woods, or are they under the overpass? Are they subsisting on meats and plants they obtain themselves, or are they getting them from others? Some hotshot young climbers I met in the nineties had gone full itinerant- got sponsorships, sold their residences and traveled around the world seeking uncomfortable conditions or working as guides, trainers or equipment manufacturers reps.

I’d love to be homeless and be rich enough to live anywhere I want whenever I want, and not have to own it. Being forced to subsist on whatever bare handed skills I could bring to bear on the food problem? That would probably really suck. I’d have to go beg a few pennies and buy ramen, unless there was good fishing … I can do that.

Do you remember the names of the climbing bums you met in the nineties? I was a pseudo-climbing bum in California in the 90's, but nothing like the hard core shower-once-a-month bums who lived full time in Yosemite Camp 4, etc. Occasionally went to Colorado for climbing...Boulder Canyon, El Dorado Canyon, Dream Canyon and other places I can't remember. Hiked Long's Peak, Bear Mountain, etc. Good times back then. Wish I was young again.

Not many, and I was never "one of them" in the climbing hierarchy. I knew them through our outdoor accounts, mainly hundreds of specialty shops. Paul Gagner was one of our reps at Atwater Carey (forerunner of Rescue Essentials), and there were others including some who died on Denali and Sagamartha... I knew very little about technical climbing and its gear, but learned a little and forgot a lot about everything from rope and ropes, to gps locators (then cutting edge and "primitive"). Buck Tilton was a good friend and associate. He trained, tested and certified my WFR. Howard Donner was our Company medical director and one of my favorite people from the wilderness medicine "establishment" such as it was at the time. Neither of the them was noted for climbing, but many climbers know them or were trained by them.
ETA: or treated by them. Both took medical shifts at Everest and Denali base camps, and Buck was stationed at the high camp above Denali base camp (some number) over 14,000 feet. Some tales to tell.

I recognized the name Paul Gagner. He's a bit before my time, but good to see he's still going strong and staying active. Dr. Steve Hong is one of the more well known climbers from the Boulder area. I bumped into him on a hike up Boulder Peak. GPS (and the internet and cell phones for that matter) was just becoming a consumer item when I was involved. I coulda used all of those a few times. Like when we got lost on a descent of Mt Conness in YNP and had to bivy in the middle of nowhere.

There are worse places to be than lost in YNP! (Depending on altitude and time of year of course). I lived in the Park for about two months with little more than a tarp, a fishing pole, an inner tube and a sleeping bag, and it was mostly idyllic.

Climbing has its share of inspring stories, but also horribly tragic, unfortunately. Especially at Everest and Denali.

Yeah. Jon Krakauer was kind of a drag to be around at Summer market, the week after (iirc) we lost Rob Hall, Scott Fisher et al.
It put a heavy pall over the whole event, a lot of very sad - even freaked out people.
I never “got it”. The downside always seemed so much greater than the upside to me.

 

[Politesse]

The daffy thing is that Republicans fervently oppose any and all actual efforts to assist unhomed families, whenever all the hand-wringing accidentally leads to the formation of a concrete plan or policy. Our rehousing program at the school where I work is under constant peril of being axed by the Board, and I assure its two relatively Progressive members are not the ones leading that charge.

If you're a Republican, the "homeless" are not true citizens, and their woes are not a practical problem to be solved. The "homeless" are a symbol of moral degeneracy, to he shunned and feared as symbols of God's wrath toward a wicked people. They want the "problem" to go away by magic, dammit, not with work, and definitely not with funding! If we would just elect some millionaire minor celebrity who lives in Orange County and brags about his gun collection to be the governor, the "homeless" would just melt away into the aether.

Dude, you need to stop with the Republican blaming.

The only thing I've blamed Republicans for are their moronic opinions, and perpetual undercutting, defunding, and outright sabotage of social services. I'm not accusing them of actually creating crime, homelessness, woods that catch fire, etc. That's Tswizzle and you and Republicans generally, fantasizing that a governor could cause any such thing. Mostly, the governor attends dinner parties and holds press conferences.

No doubt they are complicit in this mess to some (small) degree, but the lion's share is on the backs of the Democrats, particularly the progressives, who have run our big cities and the state largely unencumbered for many years now. This article from last year from the Stanford SIEPR does a good job of showing year over year data on how much we are spending and how much/little is getting accomplished:

Homelessness in California: Recent challenges and new horizons

Key Takeaways​

• Despite historic government investments over the last decade, California’s homelessness crisis remains among the worst in the US.
• Insufficient shelter capacity, lack of permanent housing, and weakened incentives for drug treatment drive persistently high rates of homelessness, particularly unsheltered, relative to other states.
• Data collection and transparency have not kept pace with spending and need to be improved to accurately assess the effectiveness of policies and government spending on homelessness.

Between 2007 and 2014, the number of people experiencing homelessness in California declined from 140k to 114k. But, after that, homelessness began accelerating (Figure 1), even as billions of dollars in federal, state, and local spending poured in to address the problem. Several factors have contributed to the persistence of homelessness in California despite these investments, including a continued dearth of shelter beds, high and rising housing costs, and changes in policies around drug offenses.

And don't ask me what I'm doing about it, as though I have any say-so or authority.

You have hands. You clearly have free time. You have money. You have a house. You have a phone. You have a vote. If it makes you angry when the government tries to address problems, get off your lazy ass. You don't have to have "authority" to take responsibility.

 

[Politesse]

To clarify, what really bugs me is the hypocrisy. If you want to be nothing more than a passive recipient of government services, fine. Go ahead and be useless. Most people are, and as long as you pay your taxes, that's your right as a citizen. But if that's you, shut up and get out of the way of those who actually care about this country, and invest our life and time in improving it. All this whiny bullshit attacking the government for "doing everything wrong", attacking the state most of us love for being a "third -world country", etc, means nothing unless you're proposing a meaningful alternative strategy. If you were just lazy alone in your room, no one would notice or care. If you're lazy AND spend your time attacking government agencies, teachers, doctors, scientists, firefighters, police, social workers, and so forth who do the actual work of improving society? If you're lazy, but vote for neofascists who defund government services and sabotage progressive projects? If you're lazy, but expect our soldiers to fight pointless wars for the sake of President Trump's ego? That is way the fuck more annoying.

 

[thebeave]

The daffy thing is that Republicans fervently oppose any and all actual efforts to assist unhomed families, whenever all the hand-wringing accidentally leads to the formation of a concrete plan or policy. Our rehousing program at the school where I work is under constant peril of being axed by the Board, and I assure its two relatively Progressive members are not the ones leading that charge.

If you're a Republican, the "homeless" are not true citizens, and their woes are not a practical problem to be solved. The "homeless" are a symbol of moral degeneracy, to he shunned and feared as symbols of God's wrath toward a wicked people. They want the "problem" to go away by magic, dammit, not with work, and definitely not with funding! If we would just elect some millionaire minor celebrity who lives in Orange County and brags about his gun collection to be the governor, the "homeless" would just melt away into the aether.

Dude, you need to stop with the Republican blaming.

The only thing I've blamed Republicans for are their moronic opinions, and perpetual undercutting, defunding, and outright sabotage of social services. I'm not accusing them of actually creating crime, homelessness, woods that catch fire, etc. That's Tswizzle and you and Republicans generally, fantasizing that a governor could cause any such thing. Mostly, the governor attends dinner parties and holds press conferences.

No doubt they are complicit in this mess to some (small) degree, but the lion's share is on the backs of the Democrats, particularly the progressives, who have run our big cities and the state largely unencumbered for many years now. This article from last year from the Stanford SIEPR does a good job of showing year over year data on how much we are spending and how much/little is getting accomplished:

Homelessness in California: Recent challenges and new horizons

Key Takeaways​

• Despite historic government investments over the last decade, California’s homelessness crisis remains among the worst in the US.
• Insufficient shelter capacity, lack of permanent housing, and weakened incentives for drug treatment drive persistently high rates of homelessness, particularly unsheltered, relative to other states.
• Data collection and transparency have not kept pace with spending and need to be improved to accurately assess the effectiveness of policies and government spending on homelessness.

Between 2007 and 2014, the number of people experiencing homelessness in California declined from 140k to 114k. But, after that, homelessness began accelerating (Figure 1), even as billions of dollars in federal, state, and local spending poured in to address the problem. Several factors have contributed to the persistence of homelessness in California despite these investments, including a continued dearth of shelter beds, high and rising housing costs, and changes in policies around drug offenses.

And don't ask me what I'm doing about it, as though I have any say-so or authority.

You have hands. You clearly have free time. You have money. You have a house. You have a phone. You have a vote. If it makes you angry when the government tries to address problems, get off your lazy ass. You don't have to have "authority" to take responsibility.

Geez, I guess I'm glad I didn't complain about big potholes on the freeway that have gone unfixed for years. I hate to think what you would shame me into doing about that.

 

[Politesse]

The daffy thing is that Republicans fervently oppose any and all actual efforts to assist unhomed families, whenever all the hand-wringing accidentally leads to the formation of a concrete plan or policy. Our rehousing program at the school where I work is under constant peril of being axed by the Board, and I assure its two relatively Progressive members are not the ones leading that charge.

If you're a Republican, the "homeless" are not true citizens, and their woes are not a practical problem to be solved. The "homeless" are a symbol of moral degeneracy, to he shunned and feared as symbols of God's wrath toward a wicked people. They want the "problem" to go away by magic, dammit, not with work, and definitely not with funding! If we would just elect some millionaire minor celebrity who lives in Orange County and brags about his gun collection to be the governor, the "homeless" would just melt away into the aether.

Dude, you need to stop with the Republican blaming.

The only thing I've blamed Republicans for are their moronic opinions, and perpetual undercutting, defunding, and outright sabotage of social services. I'm not accusing them of actually creating crime, homelessness, woods that catch fire, etc. That's Tswizzle and you and Republicans generally, fantasizing that a governor could cause any such thing. Mostly, the governor attends dinner parties and holds press conferences.

No doubt they are complicit in this mess to some (small) degree, but the lion's share is on the backs of the Democrats, particularly the progressives, who have run our big cities and the state largely unencumbered for many years now. This article from last year from the Stanford SIEPR does a good job of showing year over year data on how much we are spending and how much/little is getting accomplished:

Homelessness in California: Recent challenges and new horizons

Key Takeaways​

• Despite historic government investments over the last decade, California’s homelessness crisis remains among the worst in the US.
• Insufficient shelter capacity, lack of permanent housing, and weakened incentives for drug treatment drive persistently high rates of homelessness, particularly unsheltered, relative to other states.
• Data collection and transparency have not kept pace with spending and need to be improved to accurately assess the effectiveness of policies and government spending on homelessness.

Between 2007 and 2014, the number of people experiencing homelessness in California declined from 140k to 114k. But, after that, homelessness began accelerating (Figure 1), even as billions of dollars in federal, state, and local spending poured in to address the problem. Several factors have contributed to the persistence of homelessness in California despite these investments, including a continued dearth of shelter beds, high and rising housing costs, and changes in policies around drug offenses.

And don't ask me what I'm doing about it, as though I have any say-so or authority.

You have hands. You clearly have free time. You have money. You have a house. You have a phone. You have a vote. If it makes you angry when the government tries to address problems, get off your lazy ass. You don't have to have "authority" to take responsibility.

Geez, I guess I'm glad I didn't complain about big potholes on the freeway that have gone unfixed for years. I hate to think what you would shame me into doing about that.

There is plenty you could be doing about that. Jesus Christ, get off your ass and make a phone call or two, it's not that hard.

 

[thebeave]

The daffy thing is that Republicans fervently oppose any and all actual efforts to assist unhomed families, whenever all the hand-wringing accidentally leads to the formation of a concrete plan or policy. Our rehousing program at the school where I work is under constant peril of being axed by the Board, and I assure its two relatively Progressive members are not the ones leading that charge.

If you're a Republican, the "homeless" are not true citizens, and their woes are not a practical problem to be solved. The "homeless" are a symbol of moral degeneracy, to he shunned and feared as symbols of God's wrath toward a wicked people. They want the "problem" to go away by magic, dammit, not with work, and definitely not with funding! If we would just elect some millionaire minor celebrity who lives in Orange County and brags about his gun collection to be the governor, the "homeless" would just melt away into the aether.

Dude, you need to stop with the Republican blaming.

The only thing I've blamed Republicans for are their moronic opinions, and perpetual undercutting, defunding, and outright sabotage of social services. I'm not accusing them of actually creating crime, homelessness, woods that catch fire, etc. That's Tswizzle and you and Republicans generally, fantasizing that a governor could cause any such thing. Mostly, the governor attends dinner parties and holds press conferences.

No doubt they are complicit in this mess to some (small) degree, but the lion's share is on the backs of the Democrats, particularly the progressives, who have run our big cities and the state largely unencumbered for many years now. This article from last year from the Stanford SIEPR does a good job of showing year over year data on how much we are spending and how much/little is getting accomplished:

Homelessness in California: Recent challenges and new horizons

Key Takeaways​

• Despite historic government investments over the last decade, California’s homelessness crisis remains among the worst in the US.
• Insufficient shelter capacity, lack of permanent housing, and weakened incentives for drug treatment drive persistently high rates of homelessness, particularly unsheltered, relative to other states.
• Data collection and transparency have not kept pace with spending and need to be improved to accurately assess the effectiveness of policies and government spending on homelessness.

Between 2007 and 2014, the number of people experiencing homelessness in California declined from 140k to 114k. But, after that, homelessness began accelerating (Figure 1), even as billions of dollars in federal, state, and local spending poured in to address the problem. Several factors have contributed to the persistence of homelessness in California despite these investments, including a continued dearth of shelter beds, high and rising housing costs, and changes in policies around drug offenses.

And don't ask me what I'm doing about it, as though I have any say-so or authority.

You have hands. You clearly have free time. You have money. You have a house. You have a phone. You have a vote. If it makes you angry when the government tries to address problems, get off your lazy ass. You don't have to have "authority" to take responsibility.

Geez, I guess I'm glad I didn't complain about big potholes on the freeway that have gone unfixed for years. I hate to think what you would shame me into doing about that.

There is plenty you could be doing about that. Jesus Christ, get off your ass and make a phone call or two, it's not that hard.

So, let me get this straight....if I just call someone in charge and complain about the problem (say, potholes, homelessness, crime, sidewalk poop), I'm all good?

 

[Politesse]

The daffy thing is that Republicans fervently oppose any and all actual efforts to assist unhomed families, whenever all the hand-wringing accidentally leads to the formation of a concrete plan or policy. Our rehousing program at the school where I work is under constant peril of being axed by the Board, and I assure its two relatively Progressive members are not the ones leading that charge.

If you're a Republican, the "homeless" are not true citizens, and their woes are not a practical problem to be solved. The "homeless" are a symbol of moral degeneracy, to he shunned and feared as symbols of God's wrath toward a wicked people. They want the "problem" to go away by magic, dammit, not with work, and definitely not with funding! If we would just elect some millionaire minor celebrity who lives in Orange County and brags about his gun collection to be the governor, the "homeless" would just melt away into the aether.

Dude, you need to stop with the Republican blaming.

The only thing I've blamed Republicans for are their moronic opinions, and perpetual undercutting, defunding, and outright sabotage of social services. I'm not accusing them of actually creating crime, homelessness, woods that catch fire, etc. That's Tswizzle and you and Republicans generally, fantasizing that a governor could cause any such thing. Mostly, the governor attends dinner parties and holds press conferences.

No doubt they are complicit in this mess to some (small) degree, but the lion's share is on the backs of the Democrats, particularly the progressives, who have run our big cities and the state largely unencumbered for many years now. This article from last year from the Stanford SIEPR does a good job of showing year over year data on how much we are spending and how much/little is getting accomplished:

Homelessness in California: Recent challenges and new horizons

Key Takeaways​

• Despite historic government investments over the last decade, California’s homelessness crisis remains among the worst in the US.
• Insufficient shelter capacity, lack of permanent housing, and weakened incentives for drug treatment drive persistently high rates of homelessness, particularly unsheltered, relative to other states.
• Data collection and transparency have not kept pace with spending and need to be improved to accurately assess the effectiveness of policies and government spending on homelessness.

Between 2007 and 2014, the number of people experiencing homelessness in California declined from 140k to 114k. But, after that, homelessness began accelerating (Figure 1), even as billions of dollars in federal, state, and local spending poured in to address the problem. Several factors have contributed to the persistence of homelessness in California despite these investments, including a continued dearth of shelter beds, high and rising housing costs, and changes in policies around drug offenses.

And don't ask me what I'm doing about it, as though I have any say-so or authority.

You have hands. You clearly have free time. You have money. You have a house. You have a phone. You have a vote. If it makes you angry when the government tries to address problems, get off your lazy ass. You don't have to have "authority" to take responsibility.

Geez, I guess I'm glad I didn't complain about big potholes on the freeway that have gone unfixed for years. I hate to think what you would shame me into doing about that.

There is plenty you could be doing about that. Jesus Christ, get off your ass and make a phone call or two, it's not that hard.

So, let me get this straight....if I just call someone in charge and complain about the problem (say, potholes, homelessness, crime, sidewalk poop), I'm all good?

That is a legitimate answer to "what are you doing about it", yes. Not the best answer, but certainly better than "shit all". I mean, if you are in fact just calling to complain, you're going to annoy the relevant agencies just as much as Tswizzle is annoying me, but in the case of something like a sizeable pothole, citizen reports are in fact useful information. If you're complaining about road repairs but vote no on the frequent measures put before voters to fund said repairs, I might not think much of your intelligence.

 

[TomC]

So, let me get this straight....if I just call someone in charge and complain about the problem (say, potholes, homelessness, crime, sidewalk poop), I'm all good?

Is that really your take away from all this?
Seriously?
Tom

 

[TSwizzle]

Fourth largest economy in the world comes last when it comes to economic opportunity.

California is last in the nation when it comes to economic opportunity, while ranking 35th overall among the best states, according to the latest 2026 ratings from US News & World Report. The survey ranked all 50 states based on eight categories, from healthcare and education to crime and the economy, to determine which states are among the best and worst in America. “You run into a state like California where it obviously has some real prominent strengths, but then there’s enough prominent weaknesses that really balance those out and end up where you are at 35th overall,” US News managing editor Eric Litke told The California Post.

CA Post

Newsom should definitely run for president.

 

[Politesse]

That must be why everyone moves here for work.

 

[robnisch]

Maybe this should be in the climate change thread.
It's about the permanent collapse of the aquafers.

MSN

Years ago, I saw a picture of gauge that showed 10 feet subsidence in the last century.
Nearly 25% of our food comes from these valleys.

 

[TSwizzle]

That must be why everyone moves here for work.

Darn tootin’ they are. Setting up food outlets on the sidewalk, no permits, no hygiene, no toilets, no trash, no rent, no tax. And if you don’t have a cart, shit, the city will give you one!! California, fuck yeah baby!!

Yes, California still attracts people to certain industries. But I suspect with the advent AI the IT industry will be severely diminished. Hollywood and the entertainment/media industries have been struggling and has been in decline. California lost more people the past few years. I’m sure you know this.

 

[TSwizzle]

So you know that "wildfire" that burned down Pacific Palisades, supposedly because governor Newsom/Obama was hogging all the water to save the Delta smelt or whatever? It was, of course, deliberate arson, not a true wildfire, and the perp is a literal Florida Man, one Jonathan Rinderknecht. He's a pyromaniac from Melbourne FL who has apparently started similar fires before.

He's being charged with "destruction of property by means of fire", which seems like a rather coddling way to describe starting a fire that killed twelve people.

A mistrial was declared Friday in the arson case against Jonathan Rinderknecht, the man accused of setting what eventually became the Palisades Fire. Prosecutors said they will try again.

News

It should have been Bass and Newsom on trial.

 

[ZiprHead]

So you know that "wildfire" that burned down Pacific Palisades, supposedly because governor Newsom/Obama was hogging all the water to save the Delta smelt or whatever? It was, of course, deliberate arson, not a true wildfire, and the perp is a literal Florida Man, one Jonathan Rinderknecht. He's a pyromaniac from Melbourne FL who has apparently started similar fires before.

He's being charged with "destruction of property by means of fire", which seems like a rather coddling way to describe starting a fire that killed twelve people.

A mistrial was declared Friday in the arson case against Jonathan Rinderknecht, the man accused of setting what eventually became the Palisades Fire. Prosecutors said they will try again.

News

It should have been Bass and Newsom on trial.

Why? Did they forget to rake the forest?

 

[Politesse]

Darn tootin’ they are. Setting up food outlets on the sidewalk, no permits, no hygiene, no toilets, no trash, no rent, no tax. And if you don’t have a cart, shit, the city will give you one!! California, fuck yeah baby!!

So what you're saying is, Republicans advocate for fewer job opportunities in the state?

Yes, California still attracts people to certain industries.

The US's last handful of solvent industries, yes. When your party gets its way and tech, education, real estate, entertainment, and medicine collapse, it will plunge the rest of the nation into a steep depression. Relying on California, New York, and Texas to carry the entire economy is their plan A, and they have no plan B. So have some gratitude, eh? Even your retirement would be affected by a wholesale collapse of American economic life. Trump doesn't hound California because he doesn't need us, he bullies us because his idiot constituents cheer when he does it.